4 ms·

A product only useful at the Billion User data points level. I am 100% fine participating in what's essentially the training data for all future AI products com

A product only useful at the Billion User data points level. I am 100% fine participating in what's essentially the training data for all future AI products coming out of Google. It feels like a happy family of devices all working together for a more scientific future.

knuththetruth 8y ago
>It feels like a happy family of devices all working together for a more scientific future. With this philosophy, I’d suggest you’d avoid paying attention to the trajectory of Chinese society, perhaps even more so now that Google plans to get in bed with the CCP’s censorship and dissident quashing regime...
- Latteland 8y ago
  I believe they claim they aren't really doing that. It could be the great negative attention forced them to say that wasn't their actual plan.
  - knuththetruth 8y ago
    They said the same thing about their participation in the drone program, until an internal revolt forced them to reveal their true hand (they were actually doing it and hoping to do more of it), and subsequent internal backlash put a stop to it altogether. https://jacobinmag.com/2018/06/google-project-maven-military-tech-workers https://jacobinmag.com/2018/06/google-project-maven-military... I too hope that Googlers block what their execs are planning to do in China, but we're not there yet, and it should give one pause that their leadership are onboard with doing this in the first place.
    - Anon1096 8y ago
      Google didn't try to hide that they were working with the Pentagon to better identify targets. Their participation was well known and in the open.
      - knuththetruth 8y ago
        No it wasn't. They specifically tried to misrepresent what the project was, minimize the scope of their involvement with it, as well as Google's plans to expand it further. From the article I linked, which is an interview with a Googler who helped lead the resistance- Interviewee: ... They also tried to downplay the scope and involvement of the project. But that rhetoric dissolved when we found out that leadership had been lying. Interviewer: What were they lying about? Interviewee: From the beginning, they told us that Project Maven was a small contract purely for non-offensive purposes. They said that we weren’t building anything custom. They said that this was a one-off project only worth $9 million, and that it wasn’t part of any further collaboration with the Pentagon. Those all turned out to be lies. On April 12, DefenseOne published an article that landed like a bombshell in the company. Drawing on conversations with Pentagon officials, it revealed that Project Maven was actually a pilot project for future collaborations between Google and the military. In particular, Project Maven was part of Google’s push to win the Joint Enterprise Defense Infrastructure (JEDI) contract. JEDI is the military’s next-generation cloud that will network American forces all over the world and integrate them with AI. It’s basically Skynet. And all the big cloud providers want to win the contract because it’s worth $10 billion. When we found out that Project Maven was an audition for JEDI, people started becoming extremely concerned. And as the media attention to the story increased, we learned a lot more. For instance, Diane Greene had told us that the Project Maven contract was only for $9 million, but internally they expected it to increase to $250 million per year. And they weren’t just giving the Pentagon access to open-source software — they were going to build a massive surveillance system that gave military analysts real-time information on people, vehicles, and buildings in a Google Earth–style interface. Exposing all of those lies damaged leadership on this issue just as much as anything else that we did. That loss of trust really hurt them.
sametmax 8y ago
In history, people allowing one entity to accumulate a lot of power on the basis that they will remain benevolent have almost always be wrong. Don't assume people at the top have an agenda that are compatible with yours. The fact we are enjoying a lot of peace and freedom right now should now be a signal for us to relax : democracy is a system that needs maintenance, not some legacy you can claim ad vitam. It's our duty as a citizen to always doubt the intentions of those in power. Just like it's a flight intendent duty to check that the planes doors safety are engaged again and again. It's not a moral issue. It's just a technical requirement.
- some_account 8y ago
  There is no democracy, just the appearance of one. As an adult, I think it's everyone's responsibility to start and understand this sooner or later.
  - sametmax 8y ago
    Well yes, I do believe we are in an oligarchy and not a democracy. But it's a different point, and would strike a debate that would not help with the main argument of my comment. So I just use the word "democracy" where most people expect it, otherwise, it gets complicated.

knuththetruth 8y ago

>It feels like a happy family of devices all working together for a more scientific future. With this philosophy, I’d suggest you’d avoid paying attention to the trajectory of Chinese society, perhaps even more so now that Google plans to get in bed with the CCP’s censorship and dissident quashing regime...

Latteland 8y ago
I believe they claim they aren't really doing that. It could be the great negative attention forced them to say that wasn't their actual plan.
- knuththetruth 8y ago
  They said the same thing about their participation in the drone program, until an internal revolt forced them to reveal their true hand (they were actually doing it and hoping to do more of it), and subsequent internal backlash put a stop to it altogether. https://jacobinmag.com/2018/06/google-project-maven-military-tech-workers https://jacobinmag.com/2018/06/google-project-maven-military... I too hope that Googlers block what their execs are planning to do in China, but we're not there yet, and it should give one pause that their leadership are onboard with doing this in the first place.
  - Anon1096 8y ago
    Google didn't try to hide that they were working with the Pentagon to better identify targets. Their participation was well known and in the open.
    - knuththetruth 8y ago
      No it wasn't. They specifically tried to misrepresent what the project was, minimize the scope of their involvement with it, as well as Google's plans to expand it further. From the article I linked, which is an interview with a Googler who helped lead the resistance- Interviewee: ... They also tried to downplay the scope and involvement of the project. But that rhetoric dissolved when we found out that leadership had been lying. Interviewer: What were they lying about? Interviewee: From the beginning, they told us that Project Maven was a small contract purely for non-offensive purposes. They said that we weren’t building anything custom. They said that this was a one-off project only worth $9 million, and that it wasn’t part of any further collaboration with the Pentagon. Those all turned out to be lies. On April 12, DefenseOne published an article that landed like a bombshell in the company. Drawing on conversations with Pentagon officials, it revealed that Project Maven was actually a pilot project for future collaborations between Google and the military. In particular, Project Maven was part of Google’s push to win the Joint Enterprise Defense Infrastructure (JEDI) contract. JEDI is the military’s next-generation cloud that will network American forces all over the world and integrate them with AI. It’s basically Skynet. And all the big cloud providers want to win the contract because it’s worth $10 billion. When we found out that Project Maven was an audition for JEDI, people started becoming extremely concerned. And as the media attention to the story increased, we learned a lot more. For instance, Diane Greene had told us that the Project Maven contract was only for $9 million, but internally they expected it to increase to $250 million per year. And they weren’t just giving the Pentagon access to open-source software — they were going to build a massive surveillance system that gave military analysts real-time information on people, vehicles, and buildings in a Google Earth–style interface. Exposing all of those lies damaged leadership on this issue just as much as anything else that we did. That loss of trust really hurt them.

sametmax 8y ago

In history, people allowing one entity to accumulate a lot of power on the basis that they will remain benevolent have almost always be wrong. Don't assume people at the top have an agenda that are compatible with yours. The fact we are enjoying a lot of peace and freedom right now should now be a signal for us to relax : democracy is a system that needs maintenance, not some legacy you can claim ad vitam. It's our duty as a citizen to always doubt the intentions of those in power. Just like it's a flight intendent duty to check that the planes doors safety are engaged again and again. It's not a moral issue. It's just a technical requirement.

some_account 8y ago
There is no democracy, just the appearance of one. As an adult, I think it's everyone's responsibility to start and understand this sooner or later.
- sametmax 8y ago
  Well yes, I do believe we are in an oligarchy and not a democracy. But it's a different point, and would strike a debate that would not help with the main argument of my comment. So I just use the word "democracy" where most people expect it, otherwise, it gets complicated.